In a previous study, we reported that there were no group differences in intermediate-term (4 months post intervention) alcohol reductions across the BMI and WF conditions, and discussed that given the cost of administering an in-person motivational interview in terms of time and staffing, providing a written feedback alone may be a cost effective way of reducing alcohol use among mandated college students (White et al., 2006). However, the more long-term follow-up study from the same sample demonstrated that additive benefits of providing an in-person BMI exist for AP above and beyond the benefit from a normative written feedback alone for the mandated students (White et al., 2007). Based on findings from the present study, we conclude that not all mandated students benefit additionally from an in-person BMI. Mandated students with lower levels of AP and HED may benefit just as much from a written personalized feedback alone as from an in-person BMI. The current finding that the BMI was no more efficacious than the WF appears to differ from the previous finding (White et al., 2007). The difference in
